Who killed the World Wide Web?

>Who killed the World Wide Web?
Web 2.0

>>57541683
Yeah, but that by itself shouldn't consume the entire web to such an extent.

Surely personal resistance should have played some part, in that people used to make their own sites all by themselves using just HTML. So why would they over complicate it so much for themselves?

File: Maggot head.jpg (117KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 640x640px

>>57541669
>How did the web turn from universal access to information to selective access to entertainment?

did it though? it may be true for the few hundred popular websites people visit regularly, but does it also apply to the millions of other websites that exist out there?

Netscape (and by extension firefox) did ruin the modern web.

Also mosaic is a meme, nobody was using that shit.

Read history of violawww - it had client side scripting, ajax, css in fucking 1993. It failed because the author wasn't interested in doing a windows port.

Later netscape made a really poor clone of it with which were pretty much stuck to this day.

>>57541669
>he says as he posts on 4chan using Google's captcha

>>57542305
Isn't that an argument in favor of OP though?

>>57541669
>Who killed the World Wide Web?
Advertisers and Adobe.

>>57541669
I got you, nigga.

Bout to drop some of dat knowledge on you, OP. This be what you lookin for dawg. High grade info.

http://www.textfiles.com/

(((they)))

Presentation related:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r38al1w-h4k

>>57542442
You're being sarcastic, but you could spend the day on that site and learn some really interesting aspects of computer history. Tom Jennings' contribution is very good. And what's better is you can easily browse and view that site on any web browser, on any quality of connection, on any OS. Someone could really read all about Atari STs on the web, with an Atari ST connected to the web.

>>57542511
>Someone could really read all about Atari STs on the web, with an Atari ST connected to the web.
This is something I really think the web has lost.

>>57541669
>How did the web turn from universal access to information to selective access to entertainment?

Normies.

>What went wrong?

Aside from normies?

HTML was always shit. CSS is cool in practice, but its fundamental flaw is that it's trying to fix shit. JavaScript is shit. And HTTP is kinda shit.

What does a bowl of shit attract? Indians. And what do Indians do? They write bloated, inefficient code that's shit.

Remember this when you try to download a web page with 15MB of frameworks, ads, ad trackers, and convoluted HTML, generated by a slow-as-fuck server side program, and your smartphone is burning your hand while you wait for all this shit to load.

We have reached levels of shit that should not even be possible.

http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

>>57542511
>You're being sarcastic
Sarcastic, nigga?! Really?! You gotta problem with my vernacular, bitch?

I think dat site be dope as hell! Shiet, why you gotta be so judgmental doe.

>>57542572

This is a mix of problems with the web stack and with web developers writing bloated nonsense.

There is no reason why a 68040 or 486 based machine or higher should be unable to render attractive web pages, minus high resolution movies of course. But the web stack is crap and was an inefficient design from day one, and we have crap modern coders who amplify everything that's wrong with the web stack for ads and giggles.

>>57542581
HTML was never really meant to be "good". It was just a way of getting formatted text across as a file that's as small as possible.

>>57542572
And I think it's the most important thing that it has lost. I am fully in favour of Facebook and NetFlix apps as a technology (though the conservationist in me has a problem with Big Web stuff, but that's not for this thread). At the end of the day those apps are just the modern incarnation of a client. No one ever expected a web browser to also have an IRC chatroom -- you used a client for that.

But people really don't have as much of a philosophical imperative to adhere to the actual creed of the web.

>>57542250
Netscape really fucked things up. Thanks to extensions made by Netscape to existing standard, website creators got much more control over exactly how information looked when the original goal was to let browser decide how to best display information that websites provided. Fast forward to now and it's all about how things look and not about the underlying information being conveyed.

>>57542717
>And I think it's the most important thing that it has lost.
I agree.

The web should be accessible to not only us, but some poor kid in a 3rd world country with his Pentium II machine.

File: bernerslee.jpg (1MB, 2560x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2560x1536px

>be me
>be Tim Berners Lee
>chilling at home
>working on the next big thing
>phone rings
>"world wide web is kill"
>no

jQuery

JavaScript can be useful when used in very limited amounts for AJAX functionality, but modern web devs write everything in JS and use 10 different frameworks and external scrips which grinds even a high-end computer to a halt

((( news organizations ))) ((( content creators ))) ((( prosumers )))

isn't it obvious?

File: showbiz_opening_ceremony_4.jpg (109KB, 618x377px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 618x377px

>>57542765 >>57542717
>>57542572 >>57542511

>Someone could really read all about Atari STs on the web, with an Atari ST connected to the web.
> some poor kid in a 3rd world country with his Pentium II machine

Every web dev should have this hung on their wall.

Would it be too whimsical of me to say that the web (as it was intended to be) is the most important creation humanity has ever come up with?

Wow, we have this thread SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO much, we should just have a separate board for it.

1. Just because you showed up first, doesn't mean you're the "shepherd" of the internet. Nobody gives a fuck what you think.

2. It has a lot of entertainment because people like to be entertained.

3. It still has more "universal access" back from your shitty pic than it does now.

4. You grew up and are just thinking it changed. Nostalgia is cancer because it makes you only retroactively remove the bad part. Fuck off.

5. If there was a button to hit to make the web exactly like it was the way you think you want it to, you'd flip shit within 2 hours. You don't remember how shitty search engines were and link hunting and thousands of dead shitty websites owned by individuals who hadn't been updated in a decade. not to mention shitty internet infrastructure and no wifi or 3g.

6. Jerking off about it and crying real loud and remaking this thread every 8 hours doesn't change any of the above. Or you can fuck off and go join some BBS/IRC circlejerk full of "ye olde fags" where you just pretend to not be losers or something.

>>57541669
smart phones.

up until smart phones became popular you had to be at least remotely tech savvy to get online as it required a computer, and even those that weren't very tech savvy largely stuck to a handful of websites.

now, cellphones and tablets are pretty much toys for adults that even retards can use to get onto virtually any website. notice how when smart phone traffic exploded it's also when tumblrinas started flooding everywhere. before, they were simply too stupid to use a computer and didn't access the internet due to that.

>>57542161
the incentive and ability to use the internet to make money (or at least take it over with copyright law) is a far more powerful force than the desire to universalize knowledge.

not to mention, normalfags just plain enjoy being part of the consumerist and social media system more than the aforementioned system.

>>57543223
Butthurt web dev spotted.

Did it ever occur to you that young people could also hold these views for philosophical, moral, or environmental, reasons?

Besides, you're confused several aspects of the web there in your desperation to sound smarter and better than real developers like >>57542511 this video.

>1.
I first got online in 2004. This web I'm advocating for was already on its deathbed by this time. And its only gotten worse.

>2.
The issue is not the entertainment, it's that the structure and presentation changed to better suit the entertainment. A news site has as much javascript and overhead as youtube, when that should never be the case. Even youtube shouldn't have as much as it does. It's a video host. Despite what it wants you to think.

>3.
No idea what this means.

>4.
It has demonstrably changed. If it hadn't there'd be no issue. And again it's not nostalgia. There has been many different arguments and points put forward totally separate from nostalgia.

>5.
No one in this thread has advocated putting the clock back. And why are sites "owned by individuals" a bad thing? This is a good thing, and something that should be encouraged.

>6.
Again, missing the point entirely.

>>57543233
i would say that myspace and facebook were the real beginning of the end. facebook's existence drew nearly every single normalfag to the web on a regular basis by 2006. twitter, tumblr, instagram made it worse, and smartphones allow them on more frequently.

All of these people complaining probably didn't even disable javascript for 4chan, or have 4chanx installed.

>>57543879
Way to completely miss the point

>tfw you can't use 4chan using a text-based browser anymore

>>57543928
Why don't you explain it to me then?

>>57543879
>disable javascript
>can't post

No shit we haven't disabled it for 4chan.

>>57543945
I'm sorry I don't have time to do a detailed post but basically it's about graceful degradation. There's nothing wrong with javascript. The problem is those websites that use many megabytes of useless cruft and those that just display a blank screen when the user's browser can't run js. The video in >>57542511 is a good summary.

>>57543944
When could you?

>>57544612
Before captcha was required every time you post

Too many Web standards that were designed to allow senseless bloat, like JS and Flash. Both could be used minimally, but Web developers don't give a shit. They assume everyone and their brother is running the latest Intel i5 machine with 16 GB RAM, so why bother with any optimization?

Disabling JS and Flash will make a huge difference, but then you'll have restricted access to major Web sites like 4chan. I think moot or Hiro eventually did away with the non-JS CAPTCHAs altogether.

>>57544683
4chan X at least does non-JS captchas (it will even copy and paste and post automatically when you fill out the non Js, but then again, you need a browser that will do 4chan X

>>57544710
>4chan X at least does non-JS captchas

What's the point then? 4chan X is a script in itself, and possibly more bloated than the 4chan scripts it seeks to replace.

>>57544821
With 4chan X, you can browse 4chan without any nonfree JS. But that's not the point of this thread I guess.

>>57542644
>HTML
>that's as small as possible.

No. HTML was never about efficiency.

>>57544902
Maybe not, but I'm struggling to think of a formatted document that's smaller and easier to render than HTML.

>>57544968

HTML is a bitch to render. Parsing HTML into a DOM and applying CSS is a very CPU intensive process in modern browser engines. Fucking PostScript doesn't require as much horsepower yet is far superior as an imaging model.

And having verbose opening/closing tags for every little fucking thing is NOT small and efficient. It's crap.

I hated HTML in the late 90's. Things have only gotten worse.

>>57545041
LOL I was born in 1998 faggot why are you still on 4chan lmao

>>57545041
>Parsing HTML into a DOM and applying CSS is a very CPU intensive process in modern browser engines.
That sounds more like a problem with the browser.

>>57541669
Trying to emulate desktop apps in a stateless environment ruined everything. The web was for serving up static documents. Fuck off with your SPA's.

>>57545149
I hated Angular till I tried it. Just saying.

>>57541669
netscape invented javascript and mozilla is continuing making it even worse

>>57545170
I have tried it, along with Knockout, React and Vue. I actually liked Angular 1.x, but I have no interest in keeping up with JavaScript churn anymore (an entirely separate issue with modern web dev).

>>57545134
>>57545041
HTML's advantage was that it is super easy for people to make pages with. It's not the best, but it "just works," or works enough that it wasn't worth getting upset about.

But bare in mind that the tags weren't as prevalent on all pages as they are now. I still remember the shift from a "menu page" to a "content page" as you navigated a site.

>>57545209
Mozilla is actually on the forefront of developing WebAssembly, which eventually might save us from the nightmare that is JS.

>>57545309
>implying

Wasn't JS meant to save us from shit like ActiveX and suchlike?

Looking at what devs are like it will only make things worse.

>>57545331
With WebAssembly you'd be able to write Java, C, C#, or a bunch of other languages and it compiles down to JS, instead of trying to 'fix' JS or supplement it with a million and one different modules just to get the same functionality of inherently better languages.

Eternal September.
Also pretty much everyone in this thread is part of the problem.

>>57545534
The real problem is that rules weren't enforced from the start. The degradation would never have happened if people didn't stand for the shit as it was being done.

so now it all exacerbates continuously and people like >>57543223 think this is the way it should be.

>>57545041
PostScript would be a worthy alternative if we were all using Gopher.

File: gopher.png (130KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1920x1080px

>>57541669

It went wrong when gopher wasn't made open source. Gopher but with proper input forms could have been fantastic.

This is what the web could have looked like: gopher://gopherpedia.com

>>57545768
I'm still trying to work out what the back-end of Gopher looks like.

Like, in HTML you have tags and shit, but Gopher is just plaintext. What format does a link take with that?

>>57541669
>What went wrong?

The NSF AUP went away.

THE NSFNET BACKBONE SERVICES
Acceptable Use Policy

GENERAL PRINCIPLE:
(1) NSFNET Backbone services are provided to support open research and education in and among US research and instructional institutions, plus research arms of for-profit firms when engaged in open scholarly communication and research. Use for other purposes is not acceptable.

......................... (deletia).....................

UNACCEPTABLE USES:
(10) Use for for-profit activities unless covered by the General Principle or as a specifically acceptable use.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

(11) Extensive use for private or personal business. This statement applies to use of the NSFNET Backbone only. NSF expects that connecting networks will formulate their own use policies. The NSF Division of Networking and Communications Research and Infrastructure will resolve any questions about this Policy or its interpretation. [NSF IG App A]

>>57542250
>Also mosaic is a meme, nobody was using that shit.

Mosaic became IE. It all went downhill when Microsoft "bought" a license for Spyglass Mosaic (told them they'd get a share of the profits from sales - Microsoft never sold IE for money. Therefore, Spyglass got fucked in the typical Microsoft fashion.

>>57545926
I wonder (((who))) lobbied hardest to get this removed

>>57545949

Italians?

All the Italians I know are cheap-ass motherfuckers that want to squeeze a penny until it bleeds.

>>57542442
>http
Daayum nigga what you finna tryna pull here? Nigga know we ain't down with HTTP over here. Some wack ass cracka could hack my battlestation if I clicked on that shit, fool.

>>57542644
Then why is it in text instead of an optimized serialized format :|

>>57545041
>>57545134
dillo doesn't seem resource intensive, i think it is browser dependent for that sort of thing, or lynx for that matter.

>>57542442
HTML is better than plain text because of hyperlinks.

It was ruined by including server side CSS and JS. CSS and JS should strictly be client side tools for formatting/scripting

>>57546040
Shit ain't be eight bit clean.

Now get off my lawn.

>>57545134
>That sounds more like a problem with the browser.
No. It's a problem of having to read/parse a verbose data stream and stuff every little piece into a DOM model in memory.

>>57545291
A fair point. A 486 could handle a simple page with few tags. But as the web scaled up....

>>57545632
>tfw you will never browse a web built off Gopher delivering glorious PostScript pages

>>57546003
Italians have worse working conditions than they did 50 years ago. I wouldn't be surprised.

>>57541669
>How did the web turn from universal access to information to selective access to entertainment?

Capitalism. Give corporations an avenue for profit and they will exploit it in every way possible.

>>57545041
It's only CPU intensive if you're trying to make HTML+CSS Turing complete.

This is not (very) CPU intensive:

<body>
<h1>Page</h1>
<p>Hello world</p>
</body>

body { width: 500px; }

>>57546063
NetSurf looks a little better and uses only about 10MB more RAM, as well as having better interactivity and standard shortcuts.

Issue with NetSurf is that you can't save images. And neither of them can post on 4chan.

>>57545843

A link is just a line from the text file that's formatted in a particular way. If a line isn't formatted as required it's just ignored. This only applies for menus of course.

The wikipedia article makes links look way uglier than they need too, but it's a good place to start for understanding how gopher works. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gopher_(protocol)#Protocol

>>57545843
HTML is just plaintext.

>>57546101
This. I never like getting governments involved in things, but the web really should have been treated more like a national digital library and forum (in the classic sense) than just a wild west computer playground.

>>57546101
>Capitalism
No.

>>57546327
Yes.

>>57545926

>>57545534
>>57545573
>"I was here first so that means I'm entitled to decide how the internet runs forever"
100 posts later and you still haven't fixed anything, you also couldn't fix it with 1,000 whiny posts. these threads are just whining, like they have been since 1993, 2003, 2013, and will be in 2013. "Oh but now this particular group ruined everything because it's all slightly different and I can't change so I'll just say it all went to shit".

1980s
"muh usenet. How do we fix the internet? I was here first"
1990s
"Muh eternal september. How do we fix the internet? I was here first"
2000s
"muh normies. How do we fix the internet? I was here first"
2007
"Muh mobile users. How do we fix the internet? I was here first"
2010
"muh social media. How do we fix the internet? I was here first"


each 5 year period is chock full of stupid shits who all think they were here first, as if that gets them "points" or something, and each shit-group has a different gay opinion about "what killed the internet".

go fuck off to your bbs or irc circlejerk. Alternatively, go to google and use their year system to only find content from your particular gay area and actually re-remember it, but you won't because you know it was always shit.

>>57542250
>Also mosaic is a meme, nobody was using that shit.
Our university was using Mosaic.

>>57546554
This.

Fuck "universal access." That was never the point of the web.

I wasn't here first. I wasn't even here tenth.

Your the one who has yet to actually put forward a defence of their position the way that people in this thread have.

>>57546554
maximum autism

>>57546554
>go fuck off to your bbs

If a popular english one still existed I would.

>>57546554
You know what? Go and kill yourself. This isn't trendy 4chan talk, I legitimately want you to end your time on earth.

You're the cancer that killed the entire technological industry. Actual advancement has never mattered to you, or the ones you defend for some insane reason, it's always been about getting cash (why this matters to you though, I have no idea. Unless you're a shareholder for some corporation that sells equipment).

Many times in this thread it has been pointed out why the current web is significantly worse than its intended incarnation. It is meant to provide "univeral access" to "documents."

What you are defending is limiting the access to only people who are worthy at this moment in time. You don't care about people in developing countries with poor equipment and infrastructure. You don't care about the poor in developed countries. You don't care about quality.

This is immoral of you. And the world needs less of people like you.

>>57546554
"muh social media. How do we fix the internet? I was here first"

The dialup BBS scene was social media. Usenet was social media. IRC in 1990 was social media.

It's /all/ social media.

My brother and I ran a BBS out of our bedroom in 1986. *tips fedora*

>>57546785
I'd say the large difference (and I think it's an important one) is that BBS and IRC are personal projects. There were corporate BBSs, but most people used personal ones. Even FidoNet was just ordinary guys doing it as a project that got way out of hand.

Plus those three technologies allow the creed of the web ("universal access") to a fantastic degree. We've got close to 40 years of hardware than can interact with them.

>>57546704
I agree with you. People complain about new users and normies but don't bother creating their own god damn website and staying there. Instead it's just inane shitposts complaining about normies.

>>57546665
Things don't become popular by themselves.

Be the change you want to be.

>>57542814
Chuckled quietly.

I think it went wrong when they decided to not give developers the tools to do layout properly in case they didn't do it right. Developers wanted to control the layout and used whatever dirty hacks would let them do that(tables, empty gifs, etc) and conversely everybody did it badly because there was no way to do it right. Now there is this prevalent attitude held by webdevs where everything can be, should be a hack, that there aren't "best practices".

That and that browsers will render whatever they can instead of forcing properly written webpages.

People in these threads always say that the internet is bad today, but why?
Which sites do you wish to use, but can't because you have to download a 20kb Jquery file?
I can't think of anything but youtube.
In the past it was actually worse because you needed shitty plugins to do anything at all that isn't plain reading.
If you want to learn and inform yourself, most of the sites are pretty fucking plain.
And today there is more information then ever on the internet!
People just upload their fucking books, so others can enhance and correct them (Real World Haskell),
and you fucking complain?
It's no wonder that some web3.0 snapshit requires javascript, but why do you care?
It's just some dirt. It's a waste of time.

>>57547978
Look at just about any newspaper website. Many of those don't even display content without javascript.

>sum total of world's knowledge available at your fingertips, 24/7
>can find and purchase nearly anything without having to send mail-order forms and dig through obscure catalogs
>long-distance communication is easier than ever

What the fuck are you autists bitching about? That the internet is no longer a safe space for the socially retarded?

>>57548049
Why should I look at them? Most of them are a waste of time and energy.
Anyway, foreign affairs (one that isn't complete bullshit) is actually pretty much working without JS.
It's ugly as shit, but works.

>>57548083
>That the internet is no longer a safe space for the socially retarded?
No, you illiterate fucking moron. Literally the opposite. It's borderline inaccessible to anyone who isn't using recent hardware when that doesn't have to be the case.

>>57546665
they have evolved to be http versions of them now, called "forums", but you will claim they aren't the same because they aren't shitty and have more than 10 users

>>57546704
It's meant to provide ""universal access" to "documents"" ? Says who, says you, you are still on the same "I was here first so I decide what the internet is about" shit. Same as any other BBS and usenet, eternal september spouting fuck. In 1995 you couldn't pay $5 a month for unlimited hosting. So right now is the best time to provide what you want.

>>57546836
>>57546785
one of my favorite things about bbs nostalgia or this meme idea that sites run by individuals are superior is how you conveniently forget how fantastically they fell victim to ban circlejerking. For example, if this were a BBS run by anyone else in this thread, I'd probably be banned immediately after 2-3 reply turns because I post things you don't like and the ban button is easier than replying, and you'd justify this by saying I was a normie, trolling, or shitposting, or whatever else you wanted to make up. If you actually were part of BBS or IRC you'd remember that ban happy losers always make it to be admin and then your site and IRC explodes into a thousand copies of the same thing and then a week later the same thing happens for all the child sites and irc channels and the entire thing eventually censors itself and nobody posts anything. BBS and IRC are literally two decades of fucking butt diddling.

>>57547978
open up the blender

put in one part scared of change, inherited straight from their grandmas who fought PCs in the 70s, 80s, and 90s before retiring

put in one part hipster

put in one part special snowflake

put in one part "better than u"

put in one part not using your computer skills to make any money because you're a loser

mix it all together what do you get

a bunch of fucking luddites jerking off thinking that they're running the internet by making the same thread every two days.

>>57548101
Yeah, god forbid web developers exploit the capabilities of the majority of hardware in use today. Sorry Pornhub doesn't load on your Pentium beigebox from 1997.

>>57548214
ok bye nigga

File: atlast.png (33KB, 255x216px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 255x216px

>>57548083
>spam
>freemiums
>botnets
>youtube comments
>reddit

Frankly, I miss the socially retarded pre-aol internet.

>>57548177
BBS and IRC are literally two decades of fucking butt diddling.

facts itt

>>57548177
>ban circlejerking.

Incoming lines were precious bbs resource. Can't waste it on retards. It also culled the userbase.

It was only as circlejerky as sysop allowed it to be. But all good BBSes ran on merit (except the ones with paid subscription).

imageboards is entirely different beast, it's the web answer to fido/usenet.

>>57541669
The internet should have remained the province of professsionals and whatever hanger-on enthusiasts with ability. It's a basic necessity now with how interconnected the world is so you can't live a normal life without it anymore.

>>57548293
>none of this existed in a different form in the past because muh nostalgia or I was too young to recognize it at the time
this is why we keep having these threads.

>>57548827
The internet is still a province of professionals!
There is more to learn, more research and such then ever on the internet at any point.
You can still converse with professionals about a multitude of topics without hindrance.
Just because facebook exists now, doesn't mean you can't do anything else anymore.

It's fun to take this "I was here first" meme and apply it to other things to show how full of shit usenet pseudo-elitsts are.

>Bible was here first, all books must be about god
>Model T was here first, all cars must have a hand crank starter
>first radio use was for the military, so all radios should only be for war
>first record player was some chick singing so all records must be females singing
>first television broadcast was for the news so dancing on TV should be banned
"professionals" were here first, internet should only be used for "documents"

Adobe (Flash)
Mozilla (Javascript)
Google

>>57549647
>It's fun to take this "I was here first" meme and apply it to other things to show how full of shit usenet pseudo-elitsts are.
Who is talking about this?

I keep seeing you post this here

>>57549700
Jarkko Oikarinen (IRC)
Ward Christensen (BBS)
Tim Berners-Lee (HTML)

>>57549736
b8

>>57549745
memes

>>57549750
w-wew

>>57549524
Socially retarded places such as early fido/internet were useless for commerce and normie status signalling, there was nothing to recognize. This Not geocities, but pre-www.

>>57549700
>Implying Mozilla is responsible for Javascript
The only reason Javascript was created was to give an open alternative to Microsoft's shitty proprietary technologies.

>>57542935

This. If anything ends up shit, this is the likely reason.

>>57549605
>The internet is still a province of professionals!
There are niche facebooks now.

Facebook trapped IRC/ICQ audience.

Stackoverflows tend to silo knowledge and gamify it perversely.

Same for reddit, it siphons people into gamified circlejerks. Same for soundcloud and music. Or even youtube.

It's the paradox of bandwidth - the more platform for a niche to express, the more shit will flow to the top, bogging down any talent. When bandwidth is constrained, people can compete more on merit instead of self promotion and social circlejerking.

>>57546704

Very good post. Would read again. +1

File: Me101115c.jpg (24KB, 418x438px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 418x438px

Terry was right.
Multimedia meme terribly ruined computer communications.

>>57549885
All you are talking about is unobjective as fuck.

>>57548177
>Says who

The first line.

Of the first page.

On the first sever.

>>57544821
4chan X has plenty of bloat, but you can generally turn stuff you don't want off. As for the non-JS captcha (with 4chan X scripts instead), it is much faster than either the normal captcha or the old text one, both of which spend a lot of time loading Javascript and running various tests to gather information about your browser.

>>57548214
More like incompetently squander resources on shitty js libraries to the extent where you need the latest, greatest, shiniest machine around to do the same things I wanted to do on the web 10 years ago.

>>57549647
>Bible was here first, all books must be about god
>Model T was here first, all cars must have a hand crank starter
>first radio use was for the military, so all radios should only be for war
>first television broadcast was for the news so dancing on TV should be banned
I-I'm so sorry anon, those aren't correct.

All the bbs memes aside I think it's great the web has grown so much and more people should have access to it; what most of us are complaining about is that all the traffic goes to large, corporately controlled sites and the reason for this is that as soon as one gets off the beaten track the www essentially becomes unusable, in a large part because of the abuse of js and meme developers.

Web browsers are becoming increasingly bloated and unwieldy, ca certificates aren't safe, hosting costs way too much, services like cloudflare are a necessity to protect against ddos, advertisements are often unsafe and always vulgar, js is required on literally every site now even if the site does little more than display content, everybody wan'ts to collect and sell all the data they can get on you.
Basically the shit is rising to the surface and it sucks.

>>57550894
Hosting is cheap as shit though.
You can have a VPS for 10 bucks a month.

>>57546121

If all pages were that then no, it would not be CPU intensive.

>>57541669
The iPhone, computing for the masses.

>>57547978
>Which sites do you wish to use, but can't because you have to download a 20kb Jquery file?
>20kb

Lots of sites have reached the point where I will no longer access them on an iPhone 6. Popular Mechanics is one good example. I can literally feel the phone get hot in my hand and all I'm trying to do is scroll and read. For that to happen there is js that is racing for no good damn reason. Ads, popups, slide ups, and whatever the fuck intercepts finger flicks that should scroll the page but often do not. It's absolute shit.

Instapundit can be annoying at times, probably because of ad network adshit that they don't directly test or approve.

On my MBP there aren't really any sites I refuse to visit. But there are sites which are needlessly sluggish. This is ridiculous on a machine that can perform hundreds of billions of operations per second.

>And today there is more information then ever on the internet!
>People just upload their fucking books, so others can enhance and correct them (Real World Haskell),
>and you fucking complain?

Just because there's lots of stuff on the web doesn't mean the web architecture is worth a damn.

>>57548177
>put in one part scared of change,

Given the power of modern CPUs and the bandwidth available to most devices there should be NO delays on the web. Aside from video pages should just fucking appear, fully rendered, instantaneously.

Calling out web developers on their inefficient shit is not being afraid of change. It's calling them on their inefficient shit.

>>57550996
>Popular Mechanics
Looking at the site, it loads a lot of crap, but that crap doesn't seem to do a lot once the site has loaded, so I don't know why your iphone should overheat from that.
It's pretty much just some divs and some pictures.

It didn't though.

Web adapts the way people want it to be.

Web is huge and you can find any niche content you want. What are you bitching about?

>>57551023

It might be adshit scripts, but it's frequent enough that I won't read it on the phone any more.

>>57541669
Angular and Angular 2
and react, and node, and all that js fremworks that crash c2d

reminder that wikipedia is arguably one of the best things to happen in human history, almost none of the complaints in this thread apply to it, 100% represents what the www was originally envisioned to do, and you cunts still won't give jimmy wales his $3

>>57551023
>go to site
>click first article
>FireFox - Save - Complete
>222kb html
>496kb css file
>1.2mb of js

Fucking page is 1.9 MB without any media. Content alone...no js or media...is >700K. And why is there 1.2 MB of code? Fucking Macintosh System 6 fit on an 800K floppy with a 128K ROM in the Mac Plus. A complete fucking OS with GUI, file system, and networking took up less space than a single article.

This shit right here is what's wrong with the web.

>>57551120
>it's biased
I have written 500 words article on altcoin scam, translated from english with source.
It's was simple discarded as not appropriated and deleted by 16 years old editor.

Where's that image that shows the proportion of websites to the amount of internet traffic over the years

>How did the web turn from universal access to information to selective access to entertainment?

Because it was co-opted by people looking to profit, and when that happened, the normies came, and now we're stuck in that self-reinforcing cycle of more shit content creating more retards making money for more shit content.

There's that old idiom about the size of a community being inversely proportional to its quality or something, but I can't find a quote.

File: 150304_consumer-internet1.jpg (762KB, 900x2002px) Image search: [Google]

762KB, 900x2002px

>>57551203
This one.

>>57551336
This makes me sad.

>>57551177
This is why personal websites are better. Yes, bias will always exist, but it's a single bias rather than an overruling one.

My first contact with the Internet was Usenet, still before HTTP and HTML existed. I used NCSA Mosaic on Solaris in the 1990s.

The way I see it, the worst offender in this race to the bottom is ignoring standards. Totally agreeing with
>>57545573
>>57547041

I'm a believer in de facto standards usually being the best ones. I'm not sure how we could have enforced standards in the early days of the internet without also having all the freedom and choice that we had.
I'd like to imagine that the old internet was a Utopia, but people will always choose convenience and low cost, and that's usually what your facebooks and netflixes are offering.
I'm not sure if I'm now contradicting myself or what my point actually was, thinking is hard today.

>>57551889
The thing is that there's 'unfree' about stringent methods of discourse and presentation. To let the structure be compromised results in what has happened to """"debates"""" on campuses.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmO-ziHU_D8

>>57549971
The Reddit and Stackoverflow parts are 100% objective.

>>57552225
Maybe in the parts you look at.
When I look at Haskell questions, especially regarding libraries and such I often find the Library Authors directly explaining things.

>>57552232
>Haskal
Makes sense.

>>57548177
The better forums and IRC channels that I used to frequent had one thing in common - moderators and admin were voted in by the users, and elections were held every few months

File: Screenshot_2016-11-17_13-46-03.png (11KB, 638x481px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 638x481px

>>57552225
Furthermore, when all extra fluff is removed it's the content of the information or the argument that becomes important. Even on 4chan a similar thing occurs where posting a funny reaction image and a shallow zing can derail the entire conversation.

But really the flaw is cultural not technological. With the right culture you could easily turn reddit in to a fantastic and worthwhile platform, and its simplicity means it scales well. There's CLI clients for reddit.

Don't use it though, as it reveals how trash everything really is.

>>57545843
telnet gopher.floodgap.com 70
/

there you go

>>57552677
Looks simple, but also far too complex for its simplicity, if that makes sense?

>>57546142
>The wikipedia article makes links look way uglier than they need too
What do you mean? They look exactly like they need to be on the article.

There's common "gophermap" type formats that give you a condensed format for specifying resources but those aren't actually part of the gopher protocol.

>>57552706
It's maybe a little less human-readable than HTML but is much simpler/compact, and it only applies to menus. Actual documents will often just be plain text and even simpler.

This is a little odd to describe in web terms since HTML doesn't distinguish between a "menu" and a "document", HTML can contain both in one resource. You can kind of do the same by using a lot of informational resources (type i which typically display as inline text on the menu) in a menu but its debatable if that's a recommended practice.

You won't be authoring menus in such a format though, either they're generated from a directory's content by the server or you will use one of the common gophermap formats, so what you author might look like:

Hello world!
1Some things    things
IA picture    picture.jpg
Goodbye!

which the server translates and sends to the client:

iHello world!    (fake)    NULL    0
1Some things    /things    my.host.com    70
IA picture    /picture.jpg    my.host.com    70
iGoodbye!    (fake)    NULL    0

filling in your host as the "default" when a host field isn't specified, resolving relative paths (things) to absolute paths (/things), and assuming lines that don't look like resources are informational.

Somebody setup a /g/ gopherhole.

It's easy, just install gophernicus on your shitty linux box.

post relevant shit.

>>57552846
>>57552846
gopher://gopher.su seems pretty /g/entooman, at least from those boards and the anime reaction images gopher://gopher.su/I/images/WhyWouldYouDoThat1.jpg

I have one but not really sure what I will use it for yet:
gopher://khzai.net
http://khzai.net (experimental http proxy if you don't have a gopher client)

People started making money with it. What the fuck will normies do with "a universe of documents"? Think normies want to learn? No, they want entertainment. Porn.

Be sure to add OVERBITE to firefox to natively browse gopher.

70chan:
gopher://gopher.su/1/board

>>57552677
>>57552846
>>57552955
>>57553070
>earlier tell people to "fuck off to bbs"
>they actually start doing it
This is why you need to always post about still existing BBS / IRC, it's containment for usenet spergs.

>>57553129
fuck off normie scum

>>57553129
>/g/ - Current Technology Only REEE

>>57553129
you're a loser, nigga.

GOPHERCHAN NIGGRS

gopher://port70.net/1/chan

Be sure to add OVERBITE to firefox to natively browse gopher.

>>57546142

None of my gophermaps look like that. most of it is organization however

>>57553575
The article isn't showing a gophermap, its showing what a gopher server actually sends to a client

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gophermap

>>57553379
gopher://port70.net/0chan/about
>Gopherchan serverside has been written in <literally dead meme language>
definitely /g/

Quickly looking through the answers I saw someone pointing out Gopher and the usual people shitting on JS.

Is the problem really though current standards and technologies or the way web devs use them?

JS is great if used for what it was designed for and when necessary. If a site is made entirely on JS then blame the site.

>>57541669
>The WorldWideWeb (W3)
>(W3)
Finally, now I know why it's called w3schools.com

>>57542305
i don't use captcha

>>57553815
A dead language for a dead protocol.
It is a fine fit.

>>57553379
this is terrible, actually.

>>57554109
There's literally no point in a gopher chatroom, not when you might as well just make a telnet BBS.

Something like bbs100 can have pretty much infinite simultaneous users considering the traffic you'll get, and as many rooms as you want.

>>57541669
Microsoft wanted to privatize the Internet and they failed.

Google wants to privatize the Internet and they are succeeding.

>>57553930
The problem is with both, ultimately the web devs (ab)use the technology, but the kitchen-sink approach of these technologies is just asking for trouble too.

I don't think things would be better of if Gopher had "won" and there hadn't been a web, in that case we'd just have Javascript-enabled Gopher clients and the F resource type that embedded Flash content inline in a menu. Why I like using Gopher today is precisely because it wasn't subject to all those competing interests that shaped the web in to what it is. Gopher and the Web aren't mutually exclusive either.

http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/

File: Mark_Zuckerberg_-_South_by_Southwest_2008.jpg (275KB, 1798x2110px) Image search: [Google]

275KB, 1798x2110px

>>57541669
>Who killed the World Wide Web?
jews

>>57541669
normie internet marketers.

>>57548293
>http://motherfuckingwebsite.com/
I never get spam.
I use freemiums very little and I aknowledge their nature
Botnets are problem if by that you mean excessive surveillance over innocent people
There's addons to block youtube comments if you can't refrain yourself from reading them
what is reddit?

>>57553930
the fault lies entirely in web """"devs"""" who abuse javascript

>>57541669

Copyright law killed it. It killed countless innovation communities. It killed most hacker communities.

The MAFIAA killed the Internet. It is continually aided and abetted by Feds who think Copyright law helps rather than abuses innovators and creatives and hackers and explorers.

>>57548101

Not to mention mass surveillance makes it a liability to use Google for edgy or degenerate stuff. It also makes it a liability for you to browse a large variety of websites in general as it makes your "pattern of life" fingerprint more unique.

What I don't like about the web is that it is utterly destroying everything else.
BBS, Usenet, Gopher, IRC, FTP,etc.; if it's not already long dead it's dying, it's only used now by elitists who shun all newcomers from their echo chambers which further hastens its destruction.

I've always had a major interest in this sort of stuff, more so than more expensive parts of computing, which is lucky since I'm poor as fuck.

>>57552955
>>57552846
fiddling around with yet-another-gopherchan

gopher://khzai.net/1/chan